CITATION: Fex v. McCarthy Tetrault LLP and Turton, 2017 ONSC 1907
SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE - ONTARIO
RE: Don Fex, Plaintiff
A N D:
McCarthy Tetrault LLP, Chad Robert Turton aka Chad Kroeger, Defendants
BEFORE: P.R. Sweeny J.
HEARD: In writing
E N D O R S E M E N T
1This motion was referred to me by the Registrar, pursuant to rule 2.1.01(7), following receipt of a written request by the lawyers for the defendants under rule 2.1.01(6).
2In an endorsement dated February 24, 2017, reported at 2017 ONSC 1280, the action was stayed pending the plaintiff being notified that the court was considering dismissing the action under rule 2.1.
3The registrar sent the notice that the proceedings may be stayed or dismissed in form 2.1A to the plaintiff on February 27, 2017. The plaintiff responded on March 2, 2017. The plaintiff’s response was four and a half typewritten pages together with tabbed materials, including a disk. The plaintiff’s response is not in accordance with the registrar’s notice, in that it exceeds 10 pages in length.
4The response purports to be made by the plaintiff, Don Fex, and an individual named Elizabeth Dias. Ms. Dias has no authority to act on behalf of a party in a civil proceeding. However, I am prepared to deal with the response provided in this matter as it was submitted.
5The response does not address the issue that it is substantially similar to the claim which was dismissed on a motion for summary judgment. The response does not provide any assistance in detailing the specific nature of the claim against McCarthy Tetrault. McCarthy Tetrault were the lawyers for the co-defendants in other claims which have been dismissed.
6I am satisfied that this claim ought to be dismissed under rule 2.1 as frivolous and vexatious and an abuse of process. The defendants are entitled to their costs to be assessed. I dispense with any requirement that the plaintiff approve the form and content of the dismissal order.
7The registrar shall send a copy of this endorsement to the plaintiff and counsel for the defendants, and shall serve the formal dismissal order on the plaintiff under rule 2.1.01(5).
Sweeny J.
DATE: March 27, 2017